Yes
No
Results 1 to 20 of 45
Do you take his offer?
Let us imagine you were approached with an offer. A magician of great power would make it thus that the whole world became a fairly "generous" welfare state. It would have strong civil liberties that were, by the standards of states, quite good. It would be the sort of society a left social democrat might aim for. Enviromental catastrophe would be averted, and geographical inequality of wealth eliminated. There would still be graduations in wealth, but far less extreme. Crime would still be punished but much more gently.
The catch was that it would remain like that forever. It would not degenerate politically or economically, but it would not get better either. There would be improvements flowing from cultural and technological advance, but the political development would be forever frozen.
At first you shudder back from the offer. "But I'm an anarchist/communist!" The magician shrugs and says it's not in his power to give you an communist society. At least he is promising something that will save civilization from collapse through enviromental degredation, and will no longer leave millions to starve, his offer will eliminate war and the threat of nuclear war, which might break everything that has ever been achieved.
Further, he continues, it would be irresponsible for you to risk all that he can offer for the mere possibility of utopia.
Do you take the offer?
When the accumulation of wealth is no longer of high social importance, there will be great changes in the code of morals. We shall be able to rid ourselves of many of the pseudo-moral principles which have hag-ridden us for two hundred years, by which we have exalted some of the most distasteful of human qualities into the position of the highest virtues.
~John Maynard Keynes
[FONT=Times New Roman][/FONT]
no. what's the point of being like this at the whole time? Pretty much the same as being happy all the time or raining all the time or eating the same food all the time...
You must have shitty things in your life to apreciate the good ones.
No.
We must always fight for better.
Left-wing writers, editors & general contributors wanted at ACA The Underground
RevLeft Groups: ACA The Underground
lmao no this is begging for a catastrophe
I'm on some sickle-hammer shit
Collective Bruce Banner shit
FKA: #FF0000, AKA Mistake Not My Current State Of Joshing Gentle Peevishness For The Awesome And Terrible Majesty Of The Towering Seas Of Ire That Are Themselves The Milquetoast Shallows Fringing My Vast Oceans Of Wrath
this belongs in chit-chat as a magician is not going to turn the world into a welfare state. maybe you could get right to the heart of what you're saying here?
"bloobloobloo a capitalist welfare state is better thn nothin u guys should vote and shouldn't pass up reformsno i don't actually read what people think why do you ask"
I'm on some sickle-hammer shit
Collective Bruce Banner shit
FKA: #FF0000, AKA Mistake Not My Current State Of Joshing Gentle Peevishness For The Awesome And Terrible Majesty Of The Towering Seas Of Ire That Are Themselves The Milquetoast Shallows Fringing My Vast Oceans Of Wrath
What about the slave labour in the far east, sex slavery in western Europe, and deforestation in south America? At least with the wizard's offer you stamp this out once and for all, with no risk of Stalinism. If you have the power to end all this suffering, wouldn't it be somewhat immoral not to?
When the accumulation of wealth is no longer of high social importance, there will be great changes in the code of morals. We shall be able to rid ourselves of many of the pseudo-moral principles which have hag-ridden us for two hundred years, by which we have exalted some of the most distasteful of human qualities into the position of the highest virtues.
~John Maynard Keynes
[FONT=Times New Roman][/FONT]
You have a chance to remedy the world's ills instantly, even though you don't get your prefered system, would you take it, or stick to your guns.
When the accumulation of wealth is no longer of high social importance, there will be great changes in the code of morals. We shall be able to rid ourselves of many of the pseudo-moral principles which have hag-ridden us for two hundred years, by which we have exalted some of the most distasteful of human qualities into the position of the highest virtues.
~John Maynard Keynes
[FONT=Times New Roman][/FONT]
The thing here is that you seem to think that you can have capitalist social democracy without the problems you talk about in the first place unless, yeah, magic.
It's a silly question
I'm on some sickle-hammer shit
Collective Bruce Banner shit
FKA: #FF0000, AKA Mistake Not My Current State Of Joshing Gentle Peevishness For The Awesome And Terrible Majesty Of The Towering Seas Of Ire That Are Themselves The Milquetoast Shallows Fringing My Vast Oceans Of Wrath
Where's a wizard to do away with social democrats?
"I have declared war on the rich who prosper on our poverty, the politicians who lie to us with smiling faces, and all the mindless, heartless robots who protect them and their property." - Assata Shakur
I admit that magic is an essential part of the question, however, I just want to know how utilitarian you are. Do you take the weak tea drinker's utopia, albeit fairly boring, or do you reject his offer and struggle, even though you are not sure of the consequences?
When the accumulation of wealth is no longer of high social importance, there will be great changes in the code of morals. We shall be able to rid ourselves of many of the pseudo-moral principles which have hag-ridden us for two hundred years, by which we have exalted some of the most distasteful of human qualities into the position of the highest virtues.
~John Maynard Keynes
[FONT=Times New Roman][/FONT]
I'm gonna reject his offer because a government that won't change while everything around it is would be a recipe for disaster.
I'm on some sickle-hammer shit
Collective Bruce Banner shit
FKA: #FF0000, AKA Mistake Not My Current State Of Joshing Gentle Peevishness For The Awesome And Terrible Majesty Of The Towering Seas Of Ire That Are Themselves The Milquetoast Shallows Fringing My Vast Oceans Of Wrath
Fair enough.
When the accumulation of wealth is no longer of high social importance, there will be great changes in the code of morals. We shall be able to rid ourselves of many of the pseudo-moral principles which have hag-ridden us for two hundred years, by which we have exalted some of the most distasteful of human qualities into the position of the highest virtues.
~John Maynard Keynes
[FONT=Times New Roman][/FONT]
Nah.
If we want change, we must do it ourselves. There is no magic that can save us if we will not save ourselves.
Even if I could live in a social-democracy, I would still not be free. As the popular saying goes: "liberty or death".
Re this thread: it's always amusing how some people fail to get the idea of a thought experiment / hypothetical situation. "If a genie were to grant you three wishes, what wishes would you --" "No such thing as genies, fool!"
Anyway, yes, I'd probably go for it, for two reasons: (1) I tend to be pretty skeptical that we'll ever actually achieve our goals (sorry); (2) environmental destruction is probably the most severe threat we face right now, and I think there's a chance it'll cause societal collapse or even drive us to extinction before the end of the century, if we don't stop it (well, everybody admits there's a chance, but most would say it's too slight to worth worrying about; my view is that the chance is unknown and unknowable).
the gentry must come down, and the poor shall wear the crown
Yes, I'd accept it without a second thought. While it's not ideal, it would lead to the end of poverty, war, and other forms of human suffering caused by those two. To ignore that possibility for some kind of ideological purity is childish at best.
Last edited by Kindness; 6th April 2013 at 19:06.
I would say no.
Societies that don't evolve, die.
The Human Progress Group
Does it follow that I reject all authority? Perish the thought. In the matter of boots, I defer to the authority of the boot-maker - Mikhail Bakunin
Workers of the world unite; you have nothing to lose but your chains - Karl Marx
Pollution is nothing but the resources we are not harvesting. We allow them to disperse because we've been ignorant of their value - R. Buckminster Fuller
The important thing is not to be human but to be humane - Eliezer S. Yudkowsky
Check out my speculative fiction project: NOVA MUNDI
I would be sorely tempted because it is difficult for me to really imagine revolution actually happening. The class consciousness among capitalists when crisis breaks out and the huge amount of tools afforded to capitalist states (especially during crisis) makes revolution seem impossible to me. On the other hand, just because it seems impossible during our life times doesn't mean it would be impossible forever, and I would hate to "doom" our decedents to capitalism. I know it's a copout but I really can't decide.
Meaningless question.
If its still a capitalist system, there will still be expansionist war and exploitation. I know it's a hypothetical but I can't accept a hypothetical capitalism in which people are no longer exploited - that's the nature of it. A generous welfare state won't prevent the fact a majority of the world has to lose in order for the strongest capitalists to win. How would "geographical inequalities of wealth" be ended by providing welfare?
